linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Allow userspace to define the microcode version

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 24 Apr 2018 10:59:04 +0800
From:   Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@...hat.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Allow userspace to define the microcode version

2018-04-18 18:36 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>:
> On 18/04/2018 11:03, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>>>> QEMU setting ucode_rev automatically using the host value when
>>>> using "-cpu host" (with no need for explicit ucode_rev option)
>>>> makes sense to me.
>>> QEMU can't get the host value by rdmsr MSR_IA32_UCODE_REV directly
>>> since rdmsr will #GP when ring !=0, any idea?
>> By looking at kvm_get_msr_feature(), it looks like
>> ioctl(system_fd, KVM_GET_MSRS) would return the host MSR value
>> for us.
>
> Yes, that's exactly what it was introduced for (together with other MSRs
> including VMX capabilities).

How about the live migration? What will happen if the source and
destination machines have different microcode version?

Regards,
Wanpeng Li